Düppel considerations


This subject is being raised in our Exhibits details page, but we have decided to dedicate a separate page to this discussion

This page is not explaining the nature of Düppel or window though, is only dealing with some aspects of its historical context. A discussion was some time ago initiated during an international controversy.

Let us first start with an aspect that Fritz Trenkle had told me some weeks before he sadly died in March 1996. What he told me is, in my perspective, significant as he explained to me why some system code-names had been selected. Particularly in respect to GAF code-name practice.

Jumping back first to the start of the text at the Exhibits details page:

By the way, Hohentwiel was a historical castle north of the Lake Konstanz (Bodensee), which played a role during the terrible "Thirty Years War" (1618 - 1648). In percentage  having a higher death- and devastation rate than during the Second World War! However, it belonged to a range of code-names, which in its series had to deal with historical war places (sites). This might be in the same series as the term "Düppel"; which is equivalent to British 'window' and US-Nato "chaff". Fritz Trenkle told me a few weeks before he sadly died in March 1996, that 'Düppel' was named after the historical "battle of Düppel" in Schleswig-Holstein, which was within the series for this kind (matter) of warfare. Some doubt this, but Düppel technology was dealt with from 1941 onwards. It is most unlikely that the Germans had a secret technology, although it was totally restricted to refer to it in any sense, that they did not gave it a code-name. Some say, that 'Düppel' was, like some other things, derived from the place where the Germans for the first time found British 'window'. But that was on 24 July 1943, and they knew (and tested its properties) already since 1941! Düppel was a site rather far from the sector where 'window' was first exploited, namely during the Gomorrah raid on Hamburg. Flak was controlled by means of the small Würzburg FuSE62 D (FuMG62D), thus not by means of Giant Würzburg, which was mainly handling (controlling) fighter aircraft (some controlled friend and others watched foe aircraft). The small Würzburg possessed from its nature a practical range of say 30 km (slant-range, thus projected on the map constituting a far shorter distance). According to the ekm Rechner manual, predicting flak range was measured (handled) between 400 m and 19.9 km. Why should so far from Hamburg window stripes been found around the Schleswig-Holstein town Düppel?  Second: when we access Google, we will find the following hyperlink:    http://www.schloss-lichtenstein.de/english/zeittafel.php     The story of the 'Lichtenstein Castle' is in successive order being listed. For 1377 - 1388 - we find 'War of the Cities' and mentioning that Lichtenstein was destroyed totally afterwards. We may assume, that fighting had taken place, whether it was a battle I don't know yet, and should be investigated deeper. Here also are good signs that the code-word of 'Lichtenstein' was linked to a historical warfare. For those not acquainted with this code-name 'Lichtenstein', it was given to several types of night fighter radar; knowingly: FuG202 xx - FuG213 - FuG214 - FuG220 (= Li-SN2). By the way, a site also not too far away from Lake Konstanz. Regard also my paper on 'German airborne radar'.

Searching on 3 December 2010 for a different file in our archives, I came across one of Trenkle's references. The hand written note 'ca Dezember 1943' is Trenkle's personal writing. It is a wartime account on events related to early aspects of window (chaff) called in German language 'Düppel'.

1941 - 1943

To open it in your PDF reader please click on it

Time table in respect to the German knowledge of window (chaff), it is also providing some data on the introduction of their counter-counter measures (ECCM) against it


Brief content and selected parts of the above document (free interpretation)



We may thus regard Fritz Trenkle's claim still valid - until it is really proved that it is otherwise.



Back to, or proceed with: Exhibits details

Back to: Exhibits new